He took the job from our supposed #1 and went on to post a 33-16-6 record with a .918 SV% and a 2.47 GAA in the year we went to the SCF. His performance was a key factor in turning this club around and led us to the best season in franchise history.

He has had one season of sub .900 SV% in the NHL and in fact that's his only sub .900 save % in his entire career going back to the OHL. Injury, controversy and attitude sabotaged that season - he has noone to blame for it but himself, but most players and goalies have low spots in their careers.

His worst playoff SV% was with the Sens as a rookie (.900), and then with the Sens as a sophomore he posted .907 (while not incredible, still shows improvement). In the AHL/OHL he posted between .912 and .925 in the playoffs for 4 year span.

He spent a year in hockey purgatory because of his attitude, but after demonstrating that he could still play, he was immediately signed as the #1 goalie of a contender and outside of a very poor 6 game stretch bookending an injury he has been solid for that team. His numbers are not elite by any stretch, but they're firmly within #1 goalie territory.

Its amazing how many people want to disregard everything Emery achieved with the Senators just because they don't like the guy. He was solid for the organization and was the best goalie the team ever developed.

I guess Ottawa is pretty set in goal now, with the next Belfour in Elliott and the next Lundqvist in Lehner. They'll probably be battling each other for the Vezina on a yearly basis.

Its amazing how many people want to disregard everything Emery achieved with the Senators just because they don't like the guy. He was solid for the organization and was the best goalie the team ever developed.

I guess Ottawa is pretty set in goal now, with the next Belfour in Elliott and the next Lundqvist in Lehner. They'll probably be battling each other for the Vezina on a yearly basis.

i'm sorry, i'm excited about lehner and all, but as an organization we have been through this so many times before its just disheartening. Prusek, Glass, Emery, etc. Lehner may turn out for the best, but he also may not, which is why i still subscribe to the theory that we need to draft one goalie every year. Goalies are a crapshoot, and they can mature into stars out of nowhere or turn into busts suddenly. Any organization needs to have a steady pipeline of goaltenders in order to hit that one 'jackpot'.

i'm sorry, i'm excited about lehner and all, but as an organization we have been through this so many times before its just disheartening. Prusek, Glass, Emery, etc. Lehner may turn out for the best, but he also may not, which is why i still subscribe to the theory that we need to draft one goalie every year. Goalies are a crapshoot, and they can mature into stars out of nowhere or turn into busts suddenly. Any organization needs to have a steady pipeline of goaltenders in order to hit that one 'jackpot'.

Couldn't agree more. Remember that Mathew Chouinard guy the Sens drafted in the first round. Then drafted again a few years later. The guy who never made the NHL?

i'm sorry, i'm excited about lehner and all, but as an organization we have been through this so many times before its just disheartening. Prusek, Glass, Emery, etc. Lehner may turn out for the best, but he also may not, which is why i still subscribe to the theory that we need to draft one goalie every year. Goalies are a crapshoot, and they can mature into stars out of nowhere or turn into busts suddenly. Any organization needs to have a steady pipeline of goaltenders in order to hit that one 'jackpot'.

Emery was the #1, but the team took him to the final, not the other way around.

Doesn't work like that. I don't think Emery carried them there Patrick Roy style, but the team changed playing in front of him. He was a crucial part to the cup run, as important as any other player on the team, more important than most.

In the first two games against Anaheim he also stood on his head. The forwards couldn't score to help him out, and that was the series.

i'm sorry, i'm excited about lehner and all, but as an organization we have been through this so many times before its just disheartening. Prusek, Glass, Emery, etc. Lehner may turn out for the best, but he also may not, which is why i still subscribe to the theory that we need to draft one goalie every year. Goalies are a crapshoot, and they can mature into stars out of nowhere or turn into busts suddenly. Any organization needs to have a steady pipeline of goaltenders in order to hit that one 'jackpot'.

bingo, 100% agree. if you pick a goalie every year your are bound to get a high calibre goalie eventually. He doesn't have to be a first round pick, but I would be taking a goalie each year from round 2-4

bingo, 100% agree. if you pick a goalie every year your are bound to get a high calibre goalie eventually. He doesn't have to be a first round pick, but I would be taking a goalie each year from round 2-4

Could you argue this would make you highly susceptable to continuously ridding of goalie prospects year after year as new ones come in, and then possibly watching one or a couple flourish elsewhere? Some goalies develop slowly, if were constantly drafting new ones we could risk giving up too early, consistently.

Not arguing just asking the question. Just throwing out an opposing view point as food for thought, I dont necesarily disagree with drafting a goalie annually.

Could you argue this would make you highly susceptable to continuously ridding of goalie prospects year after year as new ones come in, and then possibly watching one or a couple flourish elsewhere? Some goalies develop slowly, if were constantly drafting new ones we could risk giving up too early, consistently.

Not arguing just asking the question. Just throwing out an opposing view point as food for thought, I dont necesarily disagree with drafting a goalie annually.

You make a good point. Its similar to defensemen as well, since the majority of defensemen and goalies come from North America. An organization can only develop so many guys at one position at a time. AHL teams fill up quickly and NHL teams can't have too many youngsters at either position and be competitive. Forwards are slightly different because many can be developed in the KHL or SEL for a few years before coming to NA and having many young forwards on an NHL or AHL roster is much more common. The NCAA is becoming a valuable resource to many NHL teams because of this, where long term project prospects can take time to develop.

I don't think you need to draft a goalie every year but you certainly shouldn't go multiple years (like the Sens did) without drafting one or two.

Danishh is right though, goaltenders are a major crapshoot. You never know what you might end up with. There's too many mental variables that can't really be measured that factor into whether a goalie will be successful in the professional ranks. I'm certainly not about to anoint Lehner as the next great goalie.

bingo, 100% agree. if you pick a goalie every year your are bound to get a high calibre goalie eventually. He doesn't have to be a first round pick, but I would be taking a goalie each year from round 2-4

I wouldn't say it has to be that early. Why? From the 2003 draft, there are 4 NHL goalies. 2 of them were drafted in the 9th round, and one was drafted first overall. Unless you're drafting really high (and even then not even), it's incredibly hard to judge an 18 year old goalie.

i also subscribe to the theory that goalies, like quarterbacks in football, should be drafted at least once a yea. There's plenty of places to let goalies develop - remember you dont have to sign ncaa players until they graduate and that elcs dont kick in until they spend time in the bigs - so some euro goalies can stay overseas for ayear or so more... Plus ther is both elmira and bingo to stock.
easily room to keep the rights to between 7-10 goalies in the system if need bePosted via Mobile Device